Kylie Winkworth, December 2024

(Note: for document with unedited fullsized photographs, READ HERE:  Winkworth Joining the Dots the PHM’s conversion to performance Dec 2024

It cannot be an accident that one of only five submissions to the EIS supporting the proposed development suggests the PHM would make a good theatre.[1]

In response to objections to the EIS [Environmental Impact Statement] that the PHM was being converted to a performance space modelled on Carriageworks, the RtS [Response to Submissions report] asserts: there is no intention to provide a live entertainment precinct as part of the Powerhouse revitalisation. The Powerhouse Museum is an exhibition space primarily and the revitalisation has been led by the demand for more flexible exhibition space.[2]

This is not true. If 75% of the museum’s exhibition galleries will be gutted and the remaining spaces reduced to just three over-scaled empty caverns unsuitable for all exhibitions,[3] including international travelling exhibitions, it is reasonable to conclude the government has something else in mind they are not willing to disclose to the public. The public deception goes back to 2020 when MAAS and Create NSW made a submission to the Pyrmont Peninsula Strategy outlining plans for a vibrant 24 hour precinct, using the same phrases and sentences that are repeated in the secret design brief and the current Powerhouse Ultimo Revitalisation SSDA EIS.[4]

Contrary to the rebuttal of objections to the conversion of the PHM into an entertainment and performance facility, buried in the EIS papers are reports revealing there are detailed plans for a live entertainment precinct in the PHM, with amplified live music concerts to be held in the three remaining spaces of the former PHM.

Arup’s Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment notes: A number of activities proposed to be held at the Powerhouse Ultimo may generate large crowds and include the provision of music, either in the form of background music or more focal entertainment. To facilitate assessment, a program outlining proposed activities to be held in each space of the Powerhouse Ultimo has been developed in conjunction with the design team and a description of these is presented in Table 31. [5]

Compounding the public deception, the contents of this program of proposed activities at the former PHM has been withheld from public scrutiny in the EIS.[6] The following pages of Arup’s report model the noise impacts of amplified live music events to be held in the gutted shells of the ‘heritage halls’ of the former Powerhouse Museum for patron numbers of 1688 or 1393 patrons, (later noted as a conservative estimate and guide only see below), in the former Wran building, and also on the new roof terrace of the Switch House. The noise impacts were modelled on front of house measurements from the 2016 of Coldplay concert at Allianz Stadium, playing to a capacity crowd. The brief for this acoustic work cites the document “Event scenario, 30 January 2024, Draft Population Rev A” , from DBJ Architects on the 30/01/24. [7] The bibliography also cites the “Powerhouse Ultimo – Design Competition Brief,” Museum of Applied Arts & Sciences, Sydney, 2022, which MAAS and Arts Minister John Graham refused to release, despite repeated promises of transparency. The Minister later claimed in budget estimates the document does not exist or was not relevant to the current plans. This is nonsense as it is clearly driving the architectural plans in the EIS.

A further technical note in the RtS reports notes: recommendations based on the above assumptions for music and patron noise, the assessment provided within the SSDA is considered conservative. It is for this reason that the results and recommendations as presented in Section 4.3.2 outlining low, medium and high risk activities be taken as a guide rather than rigidly prescriptive. For example, additional patrons beyond those stated in Tables 36 and 37 may be permissible if less than one third of the total number are talking loudly or if they are using a lower vocal effort. Furthermore, the total dBA of music may also be increased if the content contains a more balanced spectrum (i.e. less low frequency energy than assumed in the SSDA). An operational noise management plan will be developed prior to occupation. The plan will utilise the risk categories as a basis of operations and outline the measures to ensure the scheduling of exhibitions and events are classified in advance to provide sufficient notices and implement mitigations should they be required. [8]

In other words, the strategy is to build the flexibility for high intensity commercial, performance and entertainment events and seek approval later through modifications. This is what has been done at Parramatta to push the envelope to more commercial uses of a development that bears little relationship to the cabinet approved plans from 2018 for a STEM museum, or the zoning.

There is no museum or cultural need, or public benefit in reducing the PHM’s purpose designed and flexible exhibition spaces by 75% to leave just three large empty industrial scale spaces. Sydney already has the White Bay Power Station mooted as a new arts and live music space, and the power station on Cockatoo Island also used for live music and arts events, and Carriageworks as another theatre, performance, event and venue hire facility, in addition to the Cut Away at Barangaroo and Walsh Bay, not to mention the seven large performance spaces in Powerhouse Parramatta. As noted in the PMA’s EIS submission, the conversion of the former Powerhouse Museum into an arts and creative industries organisation is not consistent with the MAAS Act, a statutory obligation entirely overlooked in the EIS. Creative industries are not applied arts. And turning the PHM into a performance facility is not part of the museum’s remit for applied arts and sciences.

Above: view from the eastern courtyard looking to the Boiler Hall and Turbine Hall showing what appear to be unglazed openings and insertions and perhaps lighting grid structures in the ‘heritage halls’ which are not detailed in the plans on exhibition. There are no sections in the EIS plans for these significant spaces, clearly not designed for exhibitions but for performance and events, including amplified live music. Appendix Q Amended public domain report, Connecting with Country impression p.21 For Planning portal READ HERE.

In the last two years MAAS has spent millions hosting amplified live music concerts, parties, performance and events in the half empty Boiler Hall and other exhibition spaces.  It is obvious that the three large caverns left from the demolition of the PHM are designed for performance and venue hire not museum exhibitions; see cross section below. It’s not credible that turning the former PHM into a performance or theatre space is not part of the secret plans facilitated by the demolition or ‘decluttering’ – to use the CEO’s phrase, of 22 of the PHM’s 25 purpose designed exhibition galleries. How else to explain the unprecedented asset destruction, the extreme secrecy, and the refusal to release the design briefs and masterplan for the project, or any documents that explain the proposed uses of the empty cavernous spaces left from the Powerhouse Museum’s demolition. [9]

 

Left: Amplified live music concert in the Boiler Hall, 2022, and (Right) a party in the Engine House Steam Revolution exhibition space. Objects become handy props and receptacles for drinks.

The bigger question is what is driving the conversion of the PHM, a treasured 144 year old public museum the Minns government promised to save, (and the Berejiklian Perrottet government)?

• Why is the renowned Powerhouse Museum the government promised to save being demolished for conversion to a creative industries, contemporary arts and performance space, activities unrelated to the MAAS Act?
• Is it to ensure that Parramatta is the’ flagship’ arts centre as the CEO insists, and will have no competition for audiences from the former PHM?
• Is it because the government has realised the business case for ‘Powerhouse’ does not add up, and the current management of MAAS has no hope of generating the $38.8 million per annum in revenue from commercial activities? [10]
• Is the management of MAAS intent on reducing the former PHM to an empty shell so it can be used as a cash cow for events and venue hire, run cheaply by students and UTS, rather than operating as a museum, showing its collections in exhibitions prepared by trained curators and educators?
• Is Powerhouse Ultimo intended to replace Carriageworks, cannibalising its commercial events to prop up the high operational costs of the bloated Powerhouse Parramatta edifice?  [11]
• Or is it because the seeds of this museum demolition and conversion scheme go back to Premier Berejiklian’s strategy to extend the CBD into Pyrmont Ultimo, upzoning The Star, and supporting the discredited 24-hour casino economy, which we now know has been a cover for large scale money laundering?

The plans in the Powerhouse Ultimo Revitalisation show the management of MAAS intend to gut the PHM to reduce it to a rump of the Parramatta Powerhouse.[12] They have repeatedly promoted Parramatta as the ‘flagship’, claiming it is the largest museum in Sydney or Australia, when in fact the Real Powerhouse Museum is significantly larger, more accessible and better designed for exhibitions, collections and museum activities than Parramatta.

The EIS reveals the ‘heritage adaptation’ scheme advanced by the Infrastructure NSW and MAAS, is about turning the Powerhouse Museum into a creative industries, arts and performance facility for venue hire and amplified live music events. This use is inconsistent with the MAAS Act, and with the land use zoning for an Information and education facility – Museum.  There is no possible museum or exhibition need for the gutting of the Engine House, and Turbine and Boiler Halls to create two vast empty voids.

The objectives for the development in the EIS are markedly different from the project description in the request for SEARS, 2 February 2024. They include create additional large volume presentation spaces, including a space that is capable of use in an auditorium configuration, and leverage the industrial heritage and history of the area through adaptive reuse and conservation of heritage buildings, including by reinstating the volume of the interiors of the Boiler Hall and Turbine hall, and conservation of the fabric of the Power Station with adaptation to provide for the ongoing requirements of a contemporary museum.  The proponents are unable to say what the adaptation is for, or describe the uses of additional large volume presentation spaces, or the requirements of a contemporary museum, not that the Powerhouse Museum is or has ever been a contemporary museum since it was founded in 1880.

Above: if it looks like a theatre, and claps like a theatre, then it is a theatre and performance centre. Durbach Block Jaggers, Architectural and Urban Design Report Powerhouse Ultimo Revitalisation, 5 April 2024.

As the yellow shaded cross section above shows, the result of ‘decluttering’ the museum’s exhibition galleries and mezzanines to create large volume presentation spaces is a step towards changing the use of the site from exhibiting the Powerhouse Museum’s collection to a performance centre for live music, theatre and venue hire. The EIS has not been transparent about this objective, in keeping with a pattern of public deception around this project over the last four years.

On the 4 July 2020 the Berejiklian Perrottet government announced the Powerhouse Museum was saved, promising the museum would continue to provide an outstanding visitor experience in the areas of technology, science, engineering and design…  would complement the future focussed Parramatta facility….retain jobs at Ultimo, and the government would explore if some of the funds earmarked for relocation costs could be used on renovations.[13] None of these promises were kept. MAAS and Create NSW took no notice of these public commitments to the PHM’s future. They were working a completely different agenda, presumably with Minister Harwin’s approval.

In August 2020 the former Arts Minister personally asked the Powerhouse Museum Alliance to re-engage with the museum to support the renewal of the Powerhouse Museum, which we did in good faith. In late 2020 MAAS and Create NSW established a master planning dialogue and a curatorial dialogue, inviting museum and heritage experts and emeritus curators to advise on the museum’s renewal. Participants were asked to sign confidentiality agreements.

The respected conservation architect Alan Croker was engaged to prepare a conservation management plan (CMP) for the Powerhouse Museum. [14] His involvement, and the involvement of the PHM’s architect Lionel Glendenning, were cited in evidence to the Select Committee on the Government’s Management of the Powerhouse Museum, and in budget estimates, as evidence of the bona fides of the Powerhouse Museum Renewal project. Spruiking the conservation credentials of the project the MAAS CEO Lisa Havilah testified: we are working with award-winning architect, Lionel Glendenning, to embed his 1988 design principles into the conservation management plan at Ultimo. [15] From late 2020 Lionel Glendenning worked intensely with Alan Croker, Richard Johnson and founding PHM director Dr Lindsay Sharpe to develop a set of Design Principles to guide renewal of the Powerhouse Museum, and to be embedded in the conservation policies in the CMP. [16]

As the masterplan meetings progressed it was apparent there was a shadow planning process underway where the government’s consultants were going through the motions while working on alternate plans which were not disclosed to other participants in the ‘dialogue’. Nothing came of these ‘dialogue’ meetings; no papers, no exhibition renewal plan, and no masterplan that they’re willing to make public. It was a sham process, like the nine fake consultations held since 2020 to seek community input on the renewal of the PHM.

Two months after the July 2020 announcement the PHM was saved, staff attended a briefing on the plans where the takeout was that Harwood is now Harwin’s, the PHM will be a creative industries residency site, with a large theatre, and the museum will be reduced to a fashion and design focus, with Locomotive No.1, the Boulton and Watt and Catalina treated as vintage furniture.

Harwin has gone but remarkably this is still the agenda for the remains of the Powerhouse Museum.

In September 2020 the MAAS CEO and the former head of Create NSW made a submission on the draft Pyrmont Peninsula Place Strategy outlining plans for the ‘renewal’ of the Powerhouse Museum, testing options for a new 1500 seat lyric theatre and creative industries spaces….The Ultimo Creative Industries precinct will see the Powerhouse Museum in Ultimo as the anchor ensuring a vibrant 24-hour precinct that integrates cultural, creative and commercial uses. The future use of the Harwood building was to be resolved in the FBC due at the end of 2020. A core element of the vision for the renewed Powerhouse Ultimo is bringing the precinct to life in the evening. (Cue live music, performance, theatre and events.) The submission concludes….The creation of theatre, performance, production and rehearsal space aligns with the strategic need for increased theatre space in Sydney. [17]

The submission shows that Create NSW and MAAS never deviated from the plans in the 2018 Ultimo Presence business case, to turn the PHM into a creative industries precinct with a 1,500 seat lyric theatre and rehearsal, production and performance facilities. This letter was written just two months after then Premier Berejiklian and Treasurer Perrottet declared that the PHM would be staying in Ultimo, would continue to display technology, science, engineering and design at two major locations… and that the PHM would complement the future-focussed Parramatta facility.

At the time this submission was written, when they were already working on a Final Business Case for theatre, rehearsal and production facilities in the PHM, the MAAS CEO and Create NSW were engaging in fake consultations and sustained gas lighting of museum experts and community supporters, soliciting public feedback while withholding information about their real plans for the former PHM, plans which were completely contrary to the government’s public commitments on the future of the museum. Lisa Havilah told the Select Committee…. Over August and September the Powerhouse Museum, with Create Infrastructure, has been undertaking extensive community and stakeholder consultation to inform the development of the business case and the renewal of the museum in Ultimo. I am pleased to let you know that the consultation has had a strong and positive response from the community, including 6,000 social media engagements, 3,000 visits to the project website, 1,000 survey responses and 250 webinar attendees. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the many Powerhouse Museum stakeholders and friends across the community who so generously gave up their time and articulated their future ambitions for our institution so passionately. [18] The community’s ambitions for the future of the Powerhouse Museum were ignored.  At no stage did the CEO tell the community or museum experts attending the masterplan dialogues or the curatorial dialogues what their real plans were for the future of the Powerhouse Museum.

In June 2021, just a year after promising the Powerhouse Museum was saved, the Berejiklian government announced plans for Powerhouse Ultimo to be a fashion, design and creative industries precinct at a staggering cost of $500 million. [19] The Harwood building was excised from the project without explanation. No one in any of the fake public consultations attended by the PHM’s supporters suggested the museum should be reduced to fashion and design, or creative industries, especially given the museum’s context as part of Tech Central, and the centrality of the PHM’s internationally significant power, engineering and transport collections to the concept, design and underpinning narrative of the museum. [20]

At the close of 2021 it was clear the engagement of the eminent conservation architect Alan Croker to prepare the Powerhouse Museum’s Conservation Management Plan was just window dressing. [21] The proponents had another heritage consultant on job, who spent four years working on a CMP and heritage impact statements to justify the erasure of the Powerhouse Museum without once speaking to Lionel Glendenning the architect of the PHM, or showing any comprehension of the museum’s design, concept and the relationship between the museum and the transport and power collections for which the museum was purpose designed. Just what the client wanted. In fact, no one across the large team of architects and consultants who devised the plans for the Powerhouse Ultimo Revitalisation SSD EIS bothered to speak to the architect.

In March 2022 Alan Croker fronted consultations on the social value of the PHM where he was introduced in his role as the conservation architect preparing the CMP for the Powerhouse Museum. A month later he delivered the draft CMP. His advice on the outstanding cultural significance of the PHM was unwelcome and his contract was terminated. In September 2022 the CEO of Create NSW denied at budget estimates that there was another CMP for the Powerhouse Museum.[22]

In August 2022 UTS and the Powerhouse Museum collaborated on a scoping study for a Fashion, Textile and Design Precinct to bolster the conversion of the PHM to a creative industries precinct. The recommendations have been removed from the baseline report, but the concept is about turning what’s left of the Powerhouse Museum into a business startup hub oriented to supporting the fashion, textile and design sectors. [23] UTS is positioned to run this via its secret sponsorship agreement with the museum, a snip at $10m. [24] As the PMA has argued in its objection to the Powerhouse Ultimo Revitalisation, the preference of the management to turn the PHM into a contemporary arts and creative industries organisation is NOT consistent with the purpose of the Museum of Applied Arts and Sciences. In recent years extensive museum resources have been dedicated to funding artists, creative residents, art commissions, creative fellowships, and artistic associates running the curatorial program, with the mantra the PHM is a creative industries precinct, as if this is something happening in the neighbourhood. In fact the ‘precinct’ is internal to the museum’s operations, with the museum (that is NSW taxpayers) generously funding artists and creatives, art commissions, artistic fellowships, performance, and creative residencies of no obvious relevance to the museum’s Act or benefit to the museum and its audiences. When the MAAS CEO was running Carriageworks she stated that Carriageworks is a creative industries precinct. Now apparently it is the business of the Museum of Applied Arts and Sciences. [25]

In September 2023 the Arts Minister John Graham announced a $250m ‘heritage revitalisation’ of the Powerhouse Museum Ultimo. Supporters of the museum welcomed the announcement, reasonably expecting the government was keeping its specific promises to save the Powerhouse Museum, release the secret documents on the project, preserve the Wran legacy, save the Wran building and keep the PHM open. None of these promises were kept. The same design team and consultants who saw no heritage significance in any part of the Powerhouse Museum all kept their jobs and their focus on the museum’s demolition and downsizing.

In December 2023 the Minister announced the museum’s ‘temporary’ closure for three years from February 2024. [26] No one believes the PHM will reopen in any recognisable form, let alone by 2026 or 27. The Minister claimed the heritage renewal will revitalise the iconic 1988 Wran building on Harris St. The truth is the Wran building will be gutted, demolished and rebuilt in a smaller form, at great cost, using different materials, spoiling its conceptual rationale and function, and hiding what was a prominent cultural landmark on Harris Street behind a row of shops. The design could hardly show more contempt for the Sulman award winning building that Labor promised to save, being the only public monument named after Premier Neville Wran.

Presenting the ‘heritage revitalisation’ to the staff in February 2024 the architects said they didn’t need to change much from the concept designs approved in the dying days of the Perrottet government. The concept plans that were opposed by 95% of submissions to the EIS, and were withdrawn by the Labor government in 2023.

In July 2024 the government gazetted the state heritage listing of the Powerhouse Museum Complex, shortly after refusing the PMA’s request for an interim heritage order on the PHM. [27] Unattributed sources claimed the 1988 Wran Building, the 1988 Galleria and the 1899 Harwood Building will now be protected by heritage status alongside the original power station, preventing the entire complex from further sale or commercial development. [28] The story the Powerhouse Museum was finally saved was widely circulated by the government and news agencies on social media. None of these claims are true. The Powerhouse Museum is not saved. No part of the 1988 Sulman award winning Powerhouse Museum is conserved or retained in the wasteful and destructive Powerhouse Ultimo scheme. And the heritage listing does not prevent the sale or commercial development of the museum.

Despite the state heritage listing of the Powerhouse Museum Complex, which was in train when the request for SEARS was submitted in February 2024, the Harwood building was mysteriously excised from the EIS. The secret design brief to the architects required ‘decoupling’ the Harwood building from the Powerhouse Museum. [29] If the project is approved tens of millions of dollars will be wasted excavating a loading dock under the Switch House and forecourt, when the Harwood building’s more expansive loading is just 30 metres away. The new loading dock is only needed if the secret plan is to sell or redevelop the Harwood building. The Powerhouse Ultimo Revitalisation EIS is laying the groundwork for repurposing, downsizing and breaking up the Powerhouse Museum’s heritage and museum functions, and the pointless wastage of even more museum assets. As for embedding the Lionel Glendenning Design Principles in the CMP for the PHM’s renewal, shamelessly spruiked by the MAAS CEO in 2021, these were ignored by the heritage consultant, except for opportunistic selective quoting in the Heritage Impact Statement. The architects for the ‘revitalisation’ have come up with their own design principles, a statement of intent rather than principles, developed without reference to the museum’s design concept or even a token contact with the architect of the PHM. [30] The scheme is not just museum erasure but museum amnesia, the end of the museum’s history and the cultural memories embedded in the place for families and communities.

Since the first announcement the PHM was saved in July 2020 the community has been through nine rounds of consultations where the proponents withheld essential information and key reports about the intent of the project. The only commitment the proponents have made to justify the expenditure of more than $400 million is that three objects will return to what’s left of the former Powerhouse Museum. Just three objects out of 500,000. Over more than four years the community has been subjected to a sustained pattern of deception, unprecedented in any cultural project, let alone a museum which by definition is a permanent institution, obligated to communicate ethically, professionally and with the participation of communities. While the community attended multiple consultations in good faith, the proponents secretly pursued the downsizing and conversion of the Powerhouse Museum to a performance, theatre and creative industries precinct.

The resilience of this wasteful and destructive scheme is inexplicable, given it is contrary to the explicit public promises of two governments that the Powerhouse Museum was saved. The staggering scale of asset destruction proposed for the Powerhouse Museum is shocking.  If approved, NSW taxpayers will be slugged more than $400 million to substantially demolish and repurpose the Sulman award winning Powerhouse Museum, built for a working life of more than 100 years, set for demolition after just 36 years and more than 22 million visitors. The flow-on from the combined costs of this unguided indulgence masquerading as renewal is already evident in the paucity of cultural infrastructure funding for communities across NSW. It seems the opportunity cost is never counted in Treasury, as more money is shovelled into the PHM’s budget to cover the waste, under-performance and poor planning.

It is ten years since the former Premier Mike Baird announced in November 2014 that the Powerhouse Museum would be ‘moving’ to Parramatta. It was always a ridiculous idea, floated by Infrastructure NSW, an organisation not known for its expertise in museum planning or design. [31] Ten years on and INSW is still driving the Powerhouse Museum’s demolition. We now know the Parramatta Powerhouse is not the promised STEM museum but a multipurpose arts and entertainment centre of McMansion proportions. The museum word has gone from the PHM’s renowned brand. The heart of the Powerhouse Museum has been consigned to storage at Castle Hill. The cost of this folly is more than $1.3 billion and climbing. The Powerhouse Museum was closed and defunded to cover the cost over runs at Parramatta. But INSW is having another crack at demolishing the real Powerhouse Museum, adding $400 million plus to the taxpayers’ tab, for a toxic scheme that reduces the museum’s capacity, cultural impact and exhibition space by 75%.

The 2014 decision to ‘move’ the PHM to Parramatta was by some accounts related to declining attendance at Ultimo. But it’s not the PHM buildings or its location that has failed, it’s the management, and the trustees, and a succession of arts ministers collectively failing their responsibility to protect the public interest and the museum endowment of previous generations.

Kylie Winkworth
1 December 2024

[1] As if the Australian Live Theatre Group was just perusing the Major Projects website, noticed the PHM’s ‘revitalisation’, and thought why not turn the museum into a theatre and performance facility, uncannily as described in the September 2020 submission to the Pyrmont Peninsula Strategy. Australian Theatre Live claims in their submission: There is no similar theatre/entertainment space west of the city in an area which is among the most densely populated in Sydney. Focussing on the arts and arts performances, including theatre, opera, dance and concerts, – mainstream and classical, would make it financially more sustainable and create the nucleus for an ‘arts hub’, creating a popular, dynamic and colourful atmosphere attractive to locals and the visiting tourist trade. https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/major-projects/projects/powerhouse-ultimo-revitalisation  It seems they have overlooked Carriageworks and the White Bay Power Station, among other spaces.

[2] Appendix D Detailed Response to Submissions Tables, OP 111, p.71 https://majorprojects.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/prweb/PRRestService/mp/01/getContent?AttachRef=EXH-70255721%2120240909T061930.616%20GMT

[3] Except the power and transport exhibitions for which the Powerhouse Museum was purpose designed.

[4] Leveraging the heritage value of the site…. Improving wayfinding and permeability…the structure of the Powerhouse site responds to a context that no longer exists…achieving a strong 24 hour economy….bringing the precinct to life in through the evening….All phrases and arguments rehashed in the previous and current SSDA EIS.

[5] Appendix X Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment11 March 2024, p. 39 https://majorprojects.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/prweb/PRRestService/mp/01/getContent?AttachRef=SSD-67588459%2120240409T051323.382%20GMT

[6] The EIS by Ethos Urban includes a signed declaration that the EIS contains all available information relevant to the environmental assessment requirements and does not contain information that is false or misleading. This is false.

[7] Note 1, for table 32, p.41

[8] Appendix S, Powerhouse Ultimo Revitalisation, Response to Submissions reports. Arup, Technical Note Addendum, 2 August 2024  https://majorprojects.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/prweb/PRRestService/mp/01/getContent?AttachRef=EXH-70255721%2120240909T061934.298%20GMT

[9] The design briefs for the Parramatta Powerhouse were made public, so why not those for Powerhouse Ultimo? What is it the proponents are hiding from public scrutiny when such documents are commonly available in any comparable museum development project?

[10] The commercial revenue target for Powerhouse in 2027-28 is $38.8 million per annum. Lisa Havilah evidence to Budget Estimates, 3 September 2023, p.60. Of note MAAS has not met its very modest self-generated revenue targets since the appointment of the CEO in 2019.

[11] Developing ‘Carriageworks Ultimo’ in the former PHM would potentially pave the way for the redevelopment of Carriageworks for housing, or for its transfer to a university. Carriageworks has been operating on poverty funding since it emerged from administration in 2020. It has recently reduced and restructured its visual arts program. https://www.smh.com.au/culture/art-and-design/the-urgent-warning-cut-from-sydney-s-long-awaited-arts-and-culture-plan-20231216-p5erwf.html  After the former director of Carriageworks resigned to lead MAAS in 2019 she took the Biennale program to the PHM, and a number of artists and creatives from Carriageworks followed, finding employment and accommodation at the PHM.

[12] https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/major-projects/projects/powerhouse-ultimo-revitalisation

[13] Meaning saving hundreds of millions on the wasteful, risky and expensive removal of more than 350,000 objects in the Harwood building’s purpose designed collection stores, co-located with the PHM. The cost of the Castle Hill folly is more than $200 million to make the collection less accessible and at risk every time it is moved. https://www.nsw.gov.au/media-releases/more-powerhouse-for-people-%E2%80%93-nsw-government-to-retain-ultimo-museum

[14] Design 5 Architects https://design5.com.au/index.php/awards-2/

[15] Lisa Havilah: As we await the Government’s consideration of the business case for the renewal of the Powerhouse Museum at Ultimo, I am excited to advise that Create Infrastructure and the museum have been undertaking ongoing consultation with key stakeholders. We are working with award-winning architect, Lionel Glendenning, to embed his 1988 design principles into the conservation management plan at Ultimo. Alongside this, we have established a master planning dialogue that includes Lionel Glendenning, Richard Johnson….. Transcript of evidence 15 February 2021, p.24 Select Committee on the Government’s Management of the Powerhouse Museum and other museums and cultural projects in NSW.   https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/committees/listofcommittees/Pages/committee-details.aspx?pk=264#tab-hearingsandtranscripts

[16] Powerhouse Museum Design Principles: Lionel Glendening Architecture, Richard Johnson Exhibition Design, Alan Croker, Design 5, draft October 2021

[17] 200911 MAAS to PPPS.PDF – Google Drive  In fact Sydney ranks in the mid range of global peer cities for the number of theatres. It is in the bottom 25% of global peer cities for the number of museums.

[18] Transcript of evidence 8 October 2020, p.2 Select Committee on the Government’s Management of the Powerhouse Museum and other museums and cultural projects in NSW.   https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/committees/listofcommittees/Pages/committee-details.aspx?pk=264#tab-hearingsandtranscripts

[19] https://cdn.sanity.io/files/wkgts1b4/staging/f6d543ef35e38b5a105d53e116524e9bebd96cb7.pdf See also Linda Morris, Ultimo’s Powerhouse Museum set for $500 million makeover, SMH, 14 June 2021 https://www.smh.com.au/culture/art-and-design/ultimo-s-powerhouse-museum-set-for-500-million-makeover-20210612-p580hm.html

[20] Kylie Winkworth, Breaking up the Powerhouse Museum, ten years of the LNP at work, May 2021 https://powerhousemuseumalliance.com/what-the-experts-say/breaking-up-the-powerhouse-museum-10-years-of-the-lnp-at-work-kylie-winkworth-13-5-21/

[21] Alan Croker of Design 5 authored landmark CMPs for the Sydney Opera House, the White Bay Power Station and the Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery, among many award winning and prestigious heritage, design and conservation commissions. Alan Croker’s powerful objection to the Powerhouse Ultimo Revitalisation scheme is on this link. https://majorprojects.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/prweb/PRRestService/mp/01/getContent?AttachRef=SUB-71438258%2120240530T105853.918%20GMT

[22] Opposition Arts spokesperson and now Arts Minister, the Hon. JOHN GRAHAM: I wanted to ask about the conservation management plans commissioned for the Powerhouse Ultimo Renewal project. Why were two conservation management plans commissioned? ANNETTE PITMAN: There’s only one conservation management plan that we have produced. There’s only one that was commissioned. There’s only one that we have produced. The Hon. JOHN GRAHAM: Only one’s been produced, only one’s been commissioned, in your view? ANNETTE PITMAN: Mm-hmm…. Transcript: Budget Estimates, 5 September 2022, p.61. Annette Pitman has since been appointed CEO of the Museums of History NSW, responsible for some of the most significant heritage buildings in the country.

[23] One of the partners in the study, the Australian Fashion Council is based in the museum’s Harwood building under the Powerhouse Creative Industries Residency program. It is the peak body representing some of the biggest businesses in the fashion industry. See Advancing a Creative Industries Precinct for Sydney, UTS et al, Astrolabe Group, May 2023 https://www.uts.edu.au/sites/default/files/2023-05/Creative-Industries-Precinct-Baseline-long-report.pdf

[24] Historic $10m commitment to Powerhouse Ultimo Renewal, Powerhouse Media Release, 23 September 2022.   https://cdn.sanity.io/files/wkgts1b4/staging/36ef947ba7f799f5b2a52304ab2b1f6f307912e4.pdf For the UTS submission supporting the Powerhouse Ultimo Revitalisation SSDA see https://majorprojects.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/prweb/PRRestService/mp/01/getContent?AttachRef=SUB-71428746%2120240530T062259.722%20GMT The submission provides more detail on the role of UTS in running the ‘immersive’ creative industries academy than the PHM has been willing to disclose.

[25] See Powerhouse Museum Alliance Objection to the Powerhouse Ultimo Revitalisation SSD-67588459, part 4 https://powerhousemuseumalliance.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/PowerhouseMuseumAlliance-Winkworth.pdf Inherent in the creative industries concept is changing the focus of the museum from maximising audiences and education impacts for the whole community to programs benefitting creatives and artists. This is a fundamental misreading of the MAAS Act. This shift has had a very negative impact on the performance of MAAS across all the standard metrics, revealing a decline in audiences and education impacts, and higher costs. See Winkworth MAAS Visitor Nos. and Other Stats, charting decline and failure, May 2024 https://powerhousemuseumalliance.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Winkworth-MAAS-Visitor-Nos-Stats-Charting-Decline-2024.pdf

[26] https://www.nsw.gov.au/departments-and-agencies/enterprise-investment-and-trade/ministerial-media-releases/powerhouse-museum-heritage-overhaul

[27] https://powerhousemuseumalliance.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Winkworth-PMA-to-Penny-Sharpe-IHO-25-June-2024-1.pdf and the reply refusing the order, https://powerhousemuseumalliance.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Sharpe-to-PMA-re-IHO-28-June-2024.pdf

[28] Quoted in Architecture Au and across social media and ABC platforms. https://architectureau.com/articles/Entire-Powerhouse-Museum-Ultimo-complex-gains-heritage-listing/

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-16/heritage-listing-expanded-for-powerhouse-museum/104358466 Gazetted site specific exemptions attached to the listing allow the removal of all the post 1980 fabric of the PHM, meaning that no part of the 1988 museum is protected by the heritage listing. Furthermore, the state heritage listing does NOT prevent the sale or commercial development of parts of the Powerhouse Museum. See Kylie Winkworth Wasting the Powerhouse Museum’s Assets and Purpose, Dec 2023 https://powerhousemuseumalliance.com/phm-being-destroyed-not-saved-2023-call-to-action/kylie-winkworth-wasting-the-powerhouse-museums-assets-and-purpose/ and The Fake News of Labor’s Powerhouse Ultimo Heritage Hoax, 29 September 2024 https://powerhousemuseumalliance.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Winkworth-Fake-News-and-Labors-Heritage-Hoax-29-Sept-2024.pdf

[29] Appendix E Architectural and Design Report, p. 20 5 April 2024. https://majorprojects.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/prweb/PRRestService/mp/01/getContent?AttachRef=SSD-67588459%2120240409T051634.317%20GMT

[30] See 2.0, p11. https://majorprojects.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/prweb/PRRestService/mp/01/getContent?AttachRef=SSD-67588459%2120240409T051634.317%20GMT

[31] Kylie Winkworth, Infrastructure NSW: Stitching up the Case to Sell the Powerhouse Museum, June 2016 https://powerhousemuseumalliance.com/what-the-experts-say/infrastructure-nsw-stitching-up-the-case-to-sell-the-phm/